The discourse strategy of irrationalizing the perception of an English-language opinion article

Iurkovskaia Elena Aleksandrovna ORCID: 0000-0002-3325-4491 PhD in Philology Associate Professor, Foreign Languages Department, Irkutsk State Transport University 664074, Russia, Irkutsk region, Irkutsk, Chernyshevsky str., 15 eayur@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction

One of the leading trends in the development of modern world science is its practical orientation. In linguistics, it manifests itself in the focus of scientific analysis on solving problems of socially significant, applied importance. Thus, the focus of linguistic research often shifts from the search for an answer to the question "What is happening in language?" to try to understand how modern language practices affect the life of human society. The consequence of this process is the active "discursization" of linguistic science, as well as interest in the strategic use of language.

The subject of the research in this article is a discursive strategy implemented in an English-language opinion article. It has been suggested that the leading intention of the author of the opinion article is an attempt to influence the worldview and behavior of readers, which contradicts the conventionally recognized purpose of this genre of mass media (mass media), namely, the expression of the author's point of view. The strategic goal of the author of the article is to select the most effective linguistic means of convincing the reader of the need to make a certain decision or commit an act that activates predominantly irrational forms of human thinking. 

Methodological foundations and basic concepts of research

The theoretical and methodological basis of the research was the theory of critical discourse analysis (KDA) ^{[1, 2]}, which postulates that discourse is inseparable from the social context of its generation and interpretation. The CDA separates the micro and macro levels of public order. At the first level, we find discourse interpreted as the use of language, at the second level — power, ideology, dominance, inequality between social groups ^[3]. The critical analysis of discourse is aimed at identifying and demonstrating how social, political and other forms of power are exercised through language.

The concept of "power" in KDA theory is defined in terms of control. Dominant social groups have the power to control the actions and consciousness of members of other social groups, which is predetermined by the possibility of their access to certain "scarce" (scarce) social resources, which include not only money, status, fame, but also knowledge, information, culture and various sources of public discourse and communication ^{[1, p. 469]}.

In modern Russian-language linguistics, methods of critical discourse analysis are effectively used to study social language practices, as they make it possible to study "language as a social phenomenon, and not only as a set of individual words and grammar rules, which allows a deeper understanding of how language is used in specific contexts and how it forms and supports social relations and structures" ^{[4, p. 83]}. The tasks of the CDA include the identification and "exposure" of discursive strategies that make it possible to carry out linguistic manipulations with human consciousness. The object of KDA research is the discourses of dominant groups, through which the impact on people's consciousness is realized, and the subject is strategies for the implementation of this impact.

The concept of strategy can be interpreted, following T.A. van Dyck, as a "property of cognitive plans", which "represent the general organization of a sequence of actions and include a goal or goals of interactions" ^{[3, p. 272]}. If these goals are achieved with the involvement of language, we are talking about a discursive strategy, which can be briefly described as "a plan that is implemented with the help of discourse" ^{[5, p. 570]}. The main criterion for selecting language tools within a certain discursive strategy is the degree of their effectiveness. "A discursive strategy means how to choose and use language resources to achieve communicative goals in the most effective way" ^{[6, p. 8]}. Thus, the implementation of a certain strategy in discourse is associated with a purposeful choice of linguistic means, which is determined by factors external to the language system that determine both the specific content of the generated utterance and the form in which it is clothed.

In this study, the discursive strategy is understood as the strategy of generating discourse as an interconnected sequence of speech acts aimed at the phased implementation of the intention of the producer of discourse, or the achievement of the communicative goal of the genre. The analysis of speech acts forming the discourse of an article expressing an opinion was carried out using the method of calculating speech acts by J. Searle ^[7], according to which a speech act is a symbiosis of locution — the linguistic shell of an utterance, illocution — the communicative intention and perlocation — the communicative goal of the producer of the utterance. The tools of the theory of speech acts make it possible to use extra-linguistic factors of the illocutionary and perlocutionary levels in the analysis of discourse, which are decisive when choosing a discursive strategy.

The analysis of the discourse of an opinion article is presented in the works of T. A. van Dyck. The author defines the opinion expressed in the media as an "evaluative belief", which, in turn, is opposed to "judgments based on facts" (factual beliefs). A factual judgment should be based solely on a factual, rational basis, for example, scientific research data that has not become the subject of the author's interpretation and evaluation. However, the proportion of such judgments in the type of discourse under study is negligible. The opinion expressed in the media is always based on the value component, the author's picture of the world, a wide range of his attitudes, beliefs, stereotypes and other forms of irrational thinking, and also has an ideological background if it affects the relationship of social groups or conflicting interests ^{[3, pp. 29-30]}.

Within the framework of this article, an attempt is made to demonstrate that the judgments expressed by the author in the analyzed type of discourse receive a predominantly irrational justification, which allows us to conclude that the discursive strategy of irrationalization of the perception of the article is consciously used. The discursive strategy of irrationalizing the perception of an article expressing an opinion is understood as the purposeful choice by the author exclusively or predominantly of linguistic means that verbalize irrationally reasoned value judgments.

The specificity of irrational argumentation lies in the fact that it "addresses a person's feelings, emotions and passions and allows any techniques and methods of "persuasion"" ^{[8, p. 28]}, is not based on logical conclusions, but has the character of suggestion, characteristic of irrational forms of social interaction, such as myth and various types of propaganda the discourse. Propaganda-type discourse represents opinion as a judgment that has no alternative. Moreover, the justification of the expressed opinion is predominantly irrational or pseudo-argumentative in nature, in which the irrational is masked as rational (for example, quotations taken out of context, references to authority) ^[9]. Media texts naturally carry a propaganda load, their strategic goal is to purposefully manipulate public opinion and call for action.

Indirect directionality of an English-language article expressing an opinion

Using the example of the article It's un-British to roll out the red carpet for Donald Trump by the British edition of The Guardian dated June 2, 2019, we will illustrate the linguistic techniques by which the author, London Mayor Sadiq Khan, implements a discursive strategy of irrationalizing the perception of the article. The opinion expressed in this article is represented in the title. The author believes that "meeting Donald Trump"with all the honors"during his official visit to the UK is not British." This opinion is a value judgment, which is manifested in the use of the adjective un-British. It can be assumed that everything "un-British" is bad for the British. The facts demonstrating an attempt to give an irrational justification to this judgment can be traced both in the analysis of its linguistic representation and at a deep functional and pragmatic level. Moreover, the opinion expressed in this article acts as a "screen" behind which the true purpose of the author is hidden — to cause a negative public reaction to Donald Trump's visit to the UK.

At a deep functional and pragmatic level, the author's intention (illocution) and the method of its verbalization in discourse are studied in order to achieve the desired perlocative effect. The conventional communicative purpose of the studied type of article as a genre of media is to express an opinion. A natural speech act expressing an opinion should be an assertive one. The macro-position of the article under study is represented at the locative level by the assertion "It is not British to meet Donald Trump "with all honors" during his official visit to the UK." However, according to the theory of speech acts, at a deep illocutionary level, this speech act is an indirect directive (Ass(Dir)): "Do not greet Donald Trump 'with all the honors' during his official visit to the UK."

In the theory of speech acts, there are six groups of assertives expressing indirect directionality. The most typical for the discourse of an opinion article is Ass(Dir) of the 5th group, in which the reason for performing an action is stated through the use of modal verbs ought / should, phrases with the modal meaning had better / why not, as well as other lexical means. There are five Ass(Dir) of the 5th group in the text of this article, while the verbalizing macro-position of the Ass(Dir) article "That's why it's so un-British to be rolling out the red carpet this week for a formal state visit ..." is preceded by five paragraphs representing a negative characterization of Donald's political views Trump, which should be a weighty reason for the implementation of the directive.

Thus, the discourse of an article expressing an opinion, as a macro-speech act, is "assertive, the essence of indirect directives". Being an assertive form of expression, at the level of illocution, this discourse demonstrates the characteristics of a directive. Indirect directive is a hidden attempt to put pressure on the reader, pushing him to make a decision or commit an act based not on reasonable deliberation, taking into account many factors, but as a result of a hidden introduction into consciousness.

A consistent analysis of the linguistic representation of the content of the article made it possible to identify signs of the "layered structure" of K. Levi-Strauss ^[10], which is characteristic of the mythological type of discourse and is expressed in the repetition of the same meaning by a number of signifiers. A striking example of the "spiral" of mythological discourse is the correlation of the headline "It's un-British to roll out the red carpet for Donald Trump" and statements:

1) "That's why it's so un-British to be rolling out the red carpet..." in the fifth paragraph;

2) "Rather than bestowing Trump with a grand platform of acceptance to the world, we should be speaking out and saying that this behavior is unacceptable" in the seventh paragraph;

3) «It’s too late to stop the red-carpet treatment, but it’s not too late for the prime minister to do the right thing. Theresa May should issue a powerful rejection..." in the tenth paragraph of the article.

The macro position of the article, previously defined as "Do not meet Donald Trump " with all honors" during his official visit to the UK," is repeatedly repeated, thereby ensuring its suggestion, introduction into the minds of readers.

Linguistic means of irrationalizing the perception of an article expressing an opinion

The analysis of linguistic methods of substantiating the opinion of the author of the article revealed exclusively irrational methods of persuasion. Throughout the text, Trump's political position is characterized extremely negatively, however, the criticisms expressed are essentially declarative judgments that are based on the opposition of Trump, "a figurehead of this global far-right movement", and representatives of "a healthy democracy", to which the author obviously considers himself. All the political "sins" imputed to Trump are those only from the liberal democratic positions, which, in turn, are presented in the article as uncontestably correct. This shows the irrational, mythological nature of the justification of the author's judgment, which is relativized to the author's worldview and offers only one of the possible ways to describe the world, the most beneficial for the effective implementation of his intention.

The list of Trump's wrong political actions is built on the principle of increasing gradation and begins rather restrainedly with the approval of both sides of the anti-racist marches: "Praising the "very fine people on both sides"", and ends with the accusation of lying to the general public: "Lying deliberately and repeatedly to the public". Structuring the list according to the degree of increase in the negative nature of actions allows the author to bring the reader's consciousness to the desired emotional state of sharp rejection of Trump's position, because it is "logical" that even more bad deeds should be expected from him. A possible effect of this stylistic device is the stimulation of one of the most irrational features of mass consciousness – alarmism, which is defined as "increased anxiety caused by the expectation of a global catastrophe, apocalypse, the end of the world" ^{[11, p. 58]}.

The next paragraph begins with a list of political leaders from whom such actions, from the point of view of the author of the article, could be expected; among them are "European dictators of the 1930s and 40s, Vladimir Putin or Kim Jong-un". Through the stylistic device of the antithesis, the author actualizes one of the basic mythologies – the opposition of "friend and foe". Moreover, "outsiders", in this case the extreme right, pose an existential threat: "... threatening our hard-won rights and freedoms and the values that have defined our liberal, democratic societies for more than seventy years." The author expresses his sincere surprise that "the leader of our closest ally" joined this camp of "strangers". "One's own" has become "someone else's", which should, on a subconscious level, cause a sharply negative reaction, naturally expected from an act of betrayal. Using the antithesis, the author uses an effective method of irrational suggestion - building a positive image of "one's own" on the basis of contrasting the image of "someone else", initially, at the pre-rational level, perceived sharply negatively. The article is based on the polarization of the positive characteristics of one's own group (ingroup) and the negative characteristics of the opposing group (outgroup) ^[3]. Oppositions were noted:

1) by nationality: Unbritish versus British;

2) by political beliefs: European dictators of the 1930s and 40s, the military juntas of the 1970s and 80s, Vladimir Putin or Kim Jong-un versus our closest ally; the far right (they) versus liberal, democratic societies (we);

3) by value beliefs: Trump's views versus British values.

In order to enhance the effect of negativization, the image of Trump as a politician is presented through comparison with other extremely unpopular political figures in the UK: "Viktor Orb?n in Hungary, Matteo Salvini in Italy, Marine Le Pen in France and Nigel Farage here in the UK", who, according to the author, use the techniques of "of the fascists of the 20th century". The image of a fascist is one of the most stable negative images–stereotypes of our time. The metaphorical representation of Trump's policy in terms of fascism is an effective method of irrational argumentation in the article.

The purpose of the metaphor is to "evoke a representation." Metaphor is able to present information in the form of visual images that are easy to perceive. The emotional and imaginative perception of the world, carried out through the mechanism of metaphor, allows you not to talk, but to talk about the phenomenon. "Saying and saying are not the same thing. A person can talk, talk endlessly, but still say nothing... to show means to show, to reveal, to let see, to hear" ^{[12, p. 265]}. A metaphor, depending on the intention of the producer of the discourse, is able to present its referent in a certain perspective, it "highlights" (highlighting) or "obscures" (hiding) certain of its qualities ^{[13, p. 61]}. Comparing Trump's actions with the techniques of fascists negates any attempts to find an explanation for his political steps.

At the end of the article, the author addresses Ass(Dir)-an appeal not to forget the lessons of history: «History teaches us of the danger of being afraid to speak truth to power and the risk of failing to defend our values from the rise of the far right. At this challenging time in global politics, it’s more important than ever that we remember that lesson». The author does not explicitly express, but undoubtedly re-actualizes the theme of fascism, and, consequently, the painful historical associations associated with it in the consciousness of modern man. Thus, the author sums up his call not to give Trump a meeting "with all honors" with another popular irrational method of persuasion – a reference to authority, in this case, the authority of historical fact.

During the analysis of the article, exclusively rational methods of persuading readers were revealed. This confirms the assumption that, despite the expected presentation of the author's point of view from the opinion article as one of the possible views on the event, the author's true intentions are an attempt to form a negative public reaction to Donald Trump's visit to the UK and an appeal to give him an appropriate reception. 

Conclusion

As a result of the analysis, it becomes obvious that the opinion of the author of the type of article under study is pseudoassertive, since the real intention is to manipulate the consciousness of the readership. However, the conventional communicative purpose of the genre of the article expressing an opinion does not allow to explicitly formulate this intention in the form of a directive statement. Effective ways to achieve the desired effect are the strategic irrationalization of the perception of the article by masking the directionality of the macro-position under an assertive statement and its repeated pronouncing in order to build a sense of the lack of alternative to the expressed opinion, as well as the selection of linguistic means that actualize the irrational forms of thinking of the readership (figurative, stereotypical, associative). Effective irrational methods of persuasion are the opposition of the "friend" — "stranger" groups, the stereotyping of perception according to the model of metaphorical transfer, a reference to the authority of a historical fact.

The studied discursive strategy has a chance to become successful, and the author's position can be perceived in a given way, provided that the reader does not clearly see that the content of the article contains subjective meanings and manipulative intentions of the author, that is, is not tuned to its critical perception. The task of a linguist in such cases becomes to explain to the reader how they are trying to influence him in language, thereby contributing to the development of critical thinking skills of the general public.